Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
>> according to a group of open government advocates, the obama administration's efforts and government transparency are mixed. the sunlight foundation held a forum on whether president obama lifted to his pledge to have the most open government in american history. this discussion is 90 minutes. >> good morning. welcome to the kayseri committee and transparency event on transparency in the obama presidency. i am daniel schuman with the sunlight foundation. welcome. there are many meanings of transparency. i'm not going to get into all of them today, but i'm sure there will be many different aspects. their widely divergent opinions on the successes of the obama administration and i hope to explore some of those today. president obama made a number of promises when he was running for president. a number are still available on change.gov. during the course of the administration, new issues came up. everything from campaign finance disclosure to dealing with the lawsuit and others on visitors logs. there's been a lot of changes during the course of the administration. what i
regulations, governing those industries. when the obama administration is adding hundreds of regulations every month particularly with health care industry, the environmental situation, i don't see any coming off of anybody whether it is health care interests or industry in general. >> guest: there are a lot of regulations. lot of bad regulations and i am not suggesting all forms of regulation are good but i do think it is very clear that for example some industries like big oil and gas companies have had benefits in terms of tax breaks, there has been an effort to push back up climate's regulation, whether it is a carbon tax or a movement toward global agreements on climate, there have been efforts to pursue certain kinds of regulatory approaches more beneficial and others such as promoting free trade agreements without intensively promoting the enforcement of trade and so forth. is not whether there's regulation or not or how many regulations there are but to the regulations favor and how they impact everybody else. >> host: david rothkopf is our guest. bob in marina, california is the next
at the amount of time, particularly in the obama administration, even more so than the george w. bush of administration, you look at senior officials who go to asia, throughout the region, and also the discussion and attempt to courtney with china. there seems to be a lot of that to try to coordinate. but again coming back to jim steinberg was the fourth member of this panel would happily and armitage and joe knight looking at the die you island dispute, and said they were shocked and surprised why the level of miscommunication, ms. assessment and dangerous of that between china and japan. so it raises them up question of whether or not, i agree. i know china wants respect to whether or not what you are seeing is a strategic game, or tactical game by china to use its potential ms. assessment to kind of look like the unstable part in some of his to basically help push out some interest. and that we've been a little bit. >> steve, i think the essential question is not of domination or respect, it's about whether it will be static of whether it will be dynamic. and there is no way that n
not successfully negotiated a single new trade agreement during the first four years of the obama administration. and this administration has not yet asked congress for a renewal of trade promotion authority despite the fact that that t.p.a. expired over five years ago. the cost of inaction on trade is high because today we live in a global economy where american producers rely on access to foreign markets. more than 95% of global consumers live outside the united states. consider that in 1960 exports accounted for only 3.6% of u.s. g.d.p. today exports account for 12.5% of our g.d.p. exports of u.s. goods and services support over 10 million american jobs. if we do not aggressively pursue new market opening agreements on behalf of american workers, we will see new export opportunities go to foreign businesses and foreign workers. so while i'm pleased that we're considering pntr today, i hope that president obama in his second term will recognize the potential for increased trade opportunities through a more aggressive trade agenda. i look forward to the president signing this legislation into l
of hard-fought negotiations under both republican and democratic administrations, president obama finalized the terms of russia's ascension to the w.t.o. on november 10, 2011. russia was invited to join the organization on december 16, 2011, and officially joined in august of this year. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the remarks on pntr be placed within whatever the time agreement ultimately is. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: and i'd like my remarks not to be interrupted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: now that russia is a member of the w.t.o., for our workers to benefit, congress really has no choice but to extend permanent normal relations to russia through appeal of the -- repeal of the application of the jackson-vanik amendment. russia is now a member of the w.t.o., but they are under no obligation to extend the economic benefits of their membership to the united states unless we have normal trade relations. simply put, if congress does not act, our workers and exporters will be at a serious disadvantage in trying to exp
quota for our pork, but this administration under president obama has fallen short in its obligation to stand up with u.s. farmers on these sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards. in other words, using sound science instead of some i illegitimate reason for keeping our products out of russia. i have communicated time and again what i expected of this administration because they have to negotiate for us. in june 2011, i led a bipartisan letter with senators nelson and 26 other senators to ambassador kirk requesting his negotiators follow the steps that we have taken during consideration of the past w.t.o. accessions. so i refer to china and vietnam as examples for this administration to follow. when these countries joined the w.t.o., we use these opportunities to obtain firm sanitary, phyto-sanitary commitments from those countries that went beyond the w.t.o. sanitary, phyto-sanitary agreements. in particular, we obtained further commitments in areas of meat inspection equivalence. in addition, in june of this year, i sent another bipartisan letter with senator nelson of nebraska and 3
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6